Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LD Newswire survey has Tim Farron heading for 58-42% victor

13

Comments

  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I don't think that the Conservatives have sufficiently considered how Jeremy Corbyn being elected Labour leader would completely stuff their scaremongering about the SNP leading Labour astray.

    They might have other attack lines at their disposal though.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,027
    Mr. NorthWales, via the IMF, presumably?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214

    Mr. Owls, you'd rather have Corbyn as leader?

    Not a likely election winner but yes.

    Kendall is running for the leadership of, and in, the wrong party IMO
    If you elect Corbyn she might be the right one to lead the New SDP away from the sinking ship.
    Problem with that argument is Kendall is right of where Jenkins and Owen were and right of where Farron will be if he leads the LDs. Were the Tories to elect a rightwinger after Cameron there may be space for a Kendall led 'Blairite' Party to emerge if Corbyn were to be Labour leader, but not at the moment I don't think
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,450

    Mr. NorthWales, via the IMF, presumably?

    Not according to Sky - use of some EU funds are being considered and George Osborne is attending an ECOFIN meeting tomorrow to fight against it
  • Options
    BannedInParisBannedInParis Posts: 2,191
    Its more likely to be a split if Kendall wins than if Corbyn does.

    Corbyn win - everyone basically bites their tongue for 5 years. We've a recent precedent for that.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    UK could be on the hook for £400 million towards Greece's bridging finance. That will go down like a lead balloon

    Perhaps those complaining about the Germans could pass the hat around to raise the dosh.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited July 2015
    I don't think Jeremy Corbyn would be that much of a disaster for Labour compared to their current situation. He'd probably do about the same as Michael Foot in 1983, which wouldn't be a huge decline from May 2015 given how badly they did then.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    antifrank said:

    I don't think that the Conservatives have sufficiently considered how Jeremy Corbyn being elected Labour leader would completely stuff their scaremongering about the SNP leading Labour astray.

    They might have other attack lines at their disposal though.

    Indeed, only Corbyn could revive the 'Tartan Tories' tag in Scotland with any real feeling, even though he would be an electoral disaster south of Hadrian's Wall in Scotland he may produce a bit of a Labour revival
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,911
    HYUFD said:

    Mr. Owls, you'd rather have Corbyn as leader?

    Not a likely election winner but yes.

    Kendall is running for the leadership of, and in, the wrong party IMO
    If you elect Corbyn she might be the right one to lead the New SDP away from the sinking ship.
    Problem with that argument is Kendall is right of where Jenkins and Owen were and right of where Farron will be if he leads the LDs. Were the Tories to elect a rightwinger after Cameron there may be space for a Kendall led 'Blairite' Party to emerge if Corbyn were to be Labour leader, but not at the moment I don't think
    My leadership vote is leaning towards Cooper followed by Corbyn, Farron, Burnham, Lamb, Osborne, Boris and in last place Kendall
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,027
    Mr. NorthWales, hmm. That's despicable, yet not out of character for the EU.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    AndyJS said:

    I don't think Jeremy Corbyn would be that much of a disaster for Labour compared to their current situation. He'd probably do about the same as Michael Foot in 1983, which wouldn't be a huge decline from May 2015 given how badly they did then.

    Foot won 209 seats, Miliband 232, Kinnock 229 in 1987. Were Corbyn to match Foot's total, Labour would lose another 23 seats!
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,220

    UK could be on the hook for £400 million towards Greece's bridging finance. That will go down like a lead balloon

    Perhaps those complaining about the Germans could pass the hat around to raise the dosh.
    Do you know what, I wouldn't complain if some of our Foreign Aid budget went to help out Greece.
  • Options
    MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642

    Mr. NorthWales, via the IMF, presumably?

    Not according to Sky - use of some EU funds are being considered and George Osborne is attending an ECOFIN meeting tomorrow to fight against it
    Pretend to fight against it then roll over and cough up.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,450
    tlg86 said:

    UK could be on the hook for £400 million towards Greece's bridging finance. That will go down like a lead balloon

    Perhaps those complaining about the Germans could pass the hat around to raise the dosh.
    Do you know what, I wouldn't complain if some of our Foreign Aid budget went to help out Greece.
    I agree but that would be humanitarian aid - we should not be funding an Euro zone member
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,497

    HYUFD said:

    Mr. Owls, you'd rather have Corbyn as leader?

    Not a likely election winner but yes.

    Kendall is running for the leadership of, and in, the wrong party IMO
    If you elect Corbyn she might be the right one to lead the New SDP away from the sinking ship.
    Problem with that argument is Kendall is right of where Jenkins and Owen were and right of where Farron will be if he leads the LDs. Were the Tories to elect a rightwinger after Cameron there may be space for a Kendall led 'Blairite' Party to emerge if Corbyn were to be Labour leader, but not at the moment I don't think
    My leadership vote is leaning towards Cooper followed by Corbyn, Farron, Burnham, Lamb, Osborne, Boris and in last place Kendall
    What on earth has she done to upset you so much John? She is a Labour moderniser in the Blairite tradition. I have some reservations as to whether there is any real depth to her but it is or should be an important strand of the party which until recently helped Labour win a lot of seats that look increasingly out of reach now.

    If Kendall does as badly as the limited information is indicating a wing of a damaged and diminished party will die. What is left may be more unified but they will be considerably less electable.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,291
    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 3m3 minutes ago
    Harriet Harman tells PLP how Labour votes on second reading of Welfare Bill will be "hung around our necks" by Tories and other critics.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    AndyJS said:

    AndyJS said:

    Maybe it's time for the Ronald Reagan / 1981 / Air traffic controllers option re. striking tube workers.

    You don't think the management side could be at fault?
    I think the drivers are overpaid.
    It can't be easy keeping a train on those thin rails, especially in dark tunnels (badly remembered from Viz).
  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    HYUFD said:

    Mr. Owls, you'd rather have Corbyn as leader?

    Not a likely election winner but yes.

    Kendall is running for the leadership of, and in, the wrong party IMO
    If you elect Corbyn she might be the right one to lead the New SDP away from the sinking ship.
    Problem with that argument is Kendall is right of where Jenkins and Owen were and right of where Farron will be if he leads the LDs. Were the Tories to elect a rightwinger after Cameron there may be space for a Kendall led 'Blairite' Party to emerge if Corbyn were to be Labour leader, but not at the moment I don't think
    My leadership vote is leaning towards Cooper followed by Corbyn, Farron, Burnham, Lamb, Osborne, Boris and in last place Kendall
    There's a better chance of one of the last three being PM, than one of the first three.
  • Options
    PaulyPauly Posts: 897
    I don't think this is strictly true. An independence referendum or more powers/money to Scotland would still be a risk in any resulting coalition. Sure they may be more ideologically aligned but that won't stop these demands.
    antifrank said:

    I don't think that the Conservatives have sufficiently considered how Jeremy Corbyn being elected Labour leader would completely stuff their scaremongering about the SNP leading Labour astray.

    They might have other attack lines at their disposal though.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214

    HYUFD said:

    Mr. Owls, you'd rather have Corbyn as leader?

    Not a likely election winner but yes.

    Kendall is running for the leadership of, and in, the wrong party IMO
    If you elect Corbyn she might be the right one to lead the New SDP away from the sinking ship.
    Problem with that argument is Kendall is right of where Jenkins and Owen were and right of where Farron will be if he leads the LDs. Were the Tories to elect a rightwinger after Cameron there may be space for a Kendall led 'Blairite' Party to emerge if Corbyn were to be Labour leader, but not at the moment I don't think
    My leadership vote is leaning towards Cooper followed by Corbyn, Farron, Burnham, Lamb, Osborne, Boris and in last place Kendall
    Indeed, it does seem some Labour supporters would rather have Cameron/Osborne than Kendall, much as some Tories would have rather had Blair than Clarke
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,497
    dr_spyn said:

    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 3m3 minutes ago
    Harriet Harman tells PLP how Labour votes on second reading of Welfare Bill will be "hung around our necks" by Tories and other critics.

    I get the impression that Harriet is seriously ticked off. As was her wont she was studiously loyal to Ed and where did it get the party? Going backwards and looking less electable than ever.

    I think she feels the party is due a reality check and this is her way of doing it. She will effectively be retired from front line politics in a few months. If she is not going to do this now she never will.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,220

    tlg86 said:

    UK could be on the hook for £400 million towards Greece's bridging finance. That will go down like a lead balloon

    Perhaps those complaining about the Germans could pass the hat around to raise the dosh.
    Do you know what, I wouldn't complain if some of our Foreign Aid budget went to help out Greece.
    I agree but that would be humanitarian aid - we should not be funding an Euro zone member
    Well clearly, but it would be embarrassing for the Eurozone if we were giving one of their own foreign aid.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,027
    Hmm. By raising the issue prior to the leadership result, I wonder if Harman is taking on a role like Nicias in the Peloponnesian War, and is at risk of ensuring the very thing she does not want to occur actually takes place.
  • Options
    FensterFenster Posts: 2,115
    I'd really like to see Corbyn as leader.

    I don't say this because I want Labour to fail I am just genuinely interested in what would happen. I think the British people would give him a hearing, after all, there are very few tribal voters out there with entrenched political allegiances.

    Capitalism has its failings and those of us with young kids are worried with what kind of economy we'll have in 15 years time.

    I don't for one minute think that Corbyn and the Labour far-left have the answers to our economic future but I'd like to see him win so he can put detailed policies forward for how he'd position Britain to compete in the global marketplace.

    I'm always up for kooky and unusual ideas to be aired. After all, the outlooks of our main parties have homogenised over the past twenty years.
  • Options
    JEOJEO Posts: 3,656

    UK could be on the hook for £400 million towards Greece's bridging finance. That will go down like a lead balloon

    It's amazing how we have to keep on paying for a currency union that we opposed.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,450
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    UK could be on the hook for £400 million towards Greece's bridging finance. That will go down like a lead balloon

    Perhaps those complaining about the Germans could pass the hat around to raise the dosh.
    Do you know what, I wouldn't complain if some of our Foreign Aid budget went to help out Greece.
    I agree but that would be humanitarian aid - we should not be funding an Euro zone member
    Well clearly, but it would be embarrassing for the Eurozone if we were giving one of their own foreign aid.
    Humanitarian aid should follow need and not prevent embarrassment to Eurozone countries
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Fenster said:

    I'd really like to see Corbyn as leader.

    I don't say this because I want Labour to fail I am just genuinely interested in what would happen. I think the British people would give him a hearing, after all, there are very few tribal voters out there with entrenched political allegiances.

    Capitalism has its failings and those of us with young kids are worried with what kind of economy we'll have in 15 years time.

    I don't for one minute think that Corbyn and the Labour far-left have the answers to our economic future but I'd like to see him win so he can put detailed policies forward for how he'd position Britain to compete in the global marketplace.

    I'm always up for kooky and unusual ideas to be aired. After all, the outlooks of our main parties have homogenised over the past twenty years.

    Why play around with kooky ideas in the UK when they've recently been tried, and subsequently abandoned, in France?
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,291
    alex thomson ‏@alextomo 8m8 minutes ago
    @Channel4News we are live tonight in Athens and also in the Greek capital Brussels

    I wonder what he meant by that...
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,911
    notme said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mr. Owls, you'd rather have Corbyn as leader?

    Not a likely election winner but yes.

    Kendall is running for the leadership of, and in, the wrong party IMO
    If you elect Corbyn she might be the right one to lead the New SDP away from the sinking ship.
    Problem with that argument is Kendall is right of where Jenkins and Owen were and right of where Farron will be if he leads the LDs. Were the Tories to elect a rightwinger after Cameron there may be space for a Kendall led 'Blairite' Party to emerge if Corbyn were to be Labour leader, but not at the moment I don't think
    My leadership vote is leaning towards Cooper followed by Corbyn, Farron, Burnham, Lamb, Osborne, Boris and in last place Kendall
    There's a better chance of one of the last three being PM, than one of the first three.
    1 of the last 3 may win GE2020 I agree but it will not be Kendall.

    If Farron wins LD leadership i could easily vote LD at GE2020 unless i have persuaded Mrs BJ to come to Scotland by then.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    edited July 2015
    Fenster said:

    I'd really like to see Corbyn as leader.

    I don't say this because I want Labour to fail I am just genuinely interested in what would happen. I think the British people would give him a hearing, after all, there are very few tribal voters out there with entrenched political allegiances.

    Capitalism has its failings and those of us with young kids are worried with what kind of economy we'll have in 15 years time.

    I don't for one minute think that Corbyn and the Labour far-left have the answers to our economic future but I'd like to see him win so he can put detailed policies forward for how he'd position Britain to compete in the global marketplace.

    I'm always up for kooky and unusual ideas to be aired. After all, the outlooks of our main parties have homogenised over the past twenty years.

    Corbyn's platform would be to renationalise half the FTSE100, end any choice in education, health and other public services, raise the top tax rate to 70% to pay for increased welfare benefits and to build a 'special relationship' with Putin, Cuba and Venezuela rather than the US. It would be an interesting ideological exercise, if a disaster in practice!
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    If Corbyn wins the Labour leadership will the winner of the deputy contest still want to be deputy leader? Maybe not.
  • Options
    FensterFenster Posts: 2,115

    Fenster said:

    I'd really like to see Corbyn as leader.

    I don't say this because I want Labour to fail I am just genuinely interested in what would happen. I think the British people would give him a hearing, after all, there are very few tribal voters out there with entrenched political allegiances.

    Capitalism has its failings and those of us with young kids are worried with what kind of economy we'll have in 15 years time.

    I don't for one minute think that Corbyn and the Labour far-left have the answers to our economic future but I'd like to see him win so he can put detailed policies forward for how he'd position Britain to compete in the global marketplace.

    I'm always up for kooky and unusual ideas to be aired. After all, the outlooks of our main parties have homogenised over the past twenty years.

    Why play around with kooky ideas in the UK when they've recently been tried, and subsequently abandoned, in France?
    I bet you'd secretly love to see Corby laying out the Labour manifesto, Richard?

  • Options
    JEOJEO Posts: 3,656

    If Corbyn wins the Labour leadership will the winner of the deputy contest still want to be deputy leader? Maybe not.

    A Corbyn-Flint led party would be a hoot.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited July 2015
    dr_spyn said:

    alex thomson ‏@alextomo 8m8 minutes ago
    @Channel4News we are live tonight in Athens and also in the Greek capital Brussels

    I wonder what he meant by that...

    That Greece is no longer a country.

    Oh and kudos to rc1000, Tsipras indeed seems to be going down the road of Ramsey MacDonald, his opponents are calling for an emergency convention to expel Tsipras from his own party.
    And I believe from what I hear that indeed they have the numbers in a convention to do so.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,497
    I have already proposed today (in relation to the EU) that Cameron should be banned from playing the lottery on the basis it is not fair for the rest of us but even he couldn't end up facing a Corbyn led Labour party. Could he??
  • Options
    JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    edited July 2015
    Just looking up Flint's CV makes you realise how poor some of these Labour people's experience is:

    1982-1984 Women's Officer, National Union of Labour Students
    1985-1985 Management Trainee, Inner London Authority
    1985-1987 Policy Officer, Inner London Authority
    1988-1989 Head of Women's Unit, National Union of Students
    1989-1991 Equal Opportunities Officer, Lambeth Council
    1991-1993 Welfare and Staff Development Officer, Lambeth Council
    1994-1997 Senior Researcher and Political Officer, GMB Union
    1997-present Member of Parliament, Labour Party

    She can't even stay in one non-job for more than a couple of years.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,291
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33516069

    Man U goalie won't be joining from Spurs.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214

    notme said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mr. Owls, you'd rather have Corbyn as leader?

    Not a likely election winner but yes.

    Kendall is running for the leadership of, and in, the wrong party IMO
    If you elect Corbyn she might be the right one to lead the New SDP away from the sinking ship.
    Problem with that argument is Kendall is right of where Jenkins and Owen were and right of where Farron will be if he leads the LDs. Were the Tories to elect a rightwinger after Cameron there may be space for a Kendall led 'Blairite' Party to emerge if Corbyn were to be Labour leader, but not at the moment I don't think
    My leadership vote is leaning towards Cooper followed by Corbyn, Farron, Burnham, Lamb, Osborne, Boris and in last place Kendall
    There's a better chance of one of the last three being PM, than one of the first three.
    1 of the last 3 may win GE2020 I agree but it will not be Kendall.

    If Farron wins LD leadership i could easily vote LD at GE2020 unless i have persuaded Mrs BJ to come to Scotland by then.
    Yes, if Farron wins the LD leadership, as now looks likely, I could see several leftwingers switching back to the LDs from Labour if Kendall wins the Labour leadership.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,610
    JEO said:

    UK could be on the hook for £400 million towards Greece's bridging finance. That will go down like a lead balloon

    It's amazing how we have to keep on paying for a currency union that we opposed.
    We give the EU about £10 billion a year in any case, about the same as foreign aid.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,911
    JEO said:

    If Corbyn wins the Labour leadership will the winner of the deputy contest still want to be deputy leader? Maybe not.

    A Corbyn-Flint led party would be a hoot.
    And an excellent name for a firm of solicitors
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,497
    dr_spyn said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33516069

    Man U goalie won't be joining from Spurs.

    If Spurs are to continue their role as a feeder club for Man U they are going to have to take better care of their players.
  • Options
    FensterFenster Posts: 2,115
    Weirdly, in a Johnny Smith of The Dead Zone manner, every time I see Jean-Claude Juncker's arrogant, back-slapping TV appearances I get hallucinogenic visions of Sepp Blatter.

    They have too many oily similarities for me.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,252

    JEO said:


    A Corbyn-Flint led party would be a hoot.

    And an excellent name for a firm of solicitors
    Skinner-Flint would have been even better on both counts.
  • Options
    MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    JEO said:

    Just looking up Flint's CV makes you realise how poor some of these Labour people's experience is:

    1982-1984 Women's Officer, National Union of Labour Students
    1985-1985 Management Trainee, Inner London Authority
    1985-1987 Policy Officer, Inner London Authority
    1988-1989 Head of Women's Unit, National Union of Students
    1989-1991 Equal Opportunities Officer, Lambeth Council
    1991-1993 Welfare and Staff Development Officer, Lambeth Council
    1994-1997 Senior Researcher and Political Officer, GMB Union
    1997-present Member of Parliament, Labour Party

    She can't even stay in one non-job for more than a couple of years.

    What an embarrassing CV. After 15 odds years and the only thing to show is a list of non-jobs speaks volumes about her. No wonder Labour is so out of touch with the average working man/woman.
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    HYUFD said:

    notme said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mr. Owls, you'd rather have Corbyn as leader?

    Not a likely election winner but yes.

    Kendall is running for the leadership of, and in, the wrong party IMO
    If you elect Corbyn she might be the right one to lead the New SDP away from the sinking ship.
    Problem with that argument is Kendall is right of where Jenkins and Owen were and right of where Farron will be if he leads the LDs. Were the Tories to elect a rightwinger after Cameron there may be space for a Kendall led 'Blairite' Party to emerge if Corbyn were to be Labour leader, but not at the moment I don't think
    My leadership vote is leaning towards Cooper followed by Corbyn, Farron, Burnham, Lamb, Osborne, Boris and in last place Kendall
    There's a better chance of one of the last three being PM, than one of the first three.
    1 of the last 3 may win GE2020 I agree but it will not be Kendall.

    If Farron wins LD leadership i could easily vote LD at GE2020 unless i have persuaded Mrs BJ to come to Scotland by then.
    Yes, if Farron wins the LD leadership, as now looks likely, I could see several leftwingers switching back to the LDs from Labour if Kendall wins the Labour leadership.

    Being liberal is not the same as being left wing.

    The Lib Dems want the same pro business and prudent economic policies as Liz Kendall. Indded whilst Lib Dems are left wing on social issues they are right wing on economics.

    So I don't see left wing Labour defectors joining the Lib Dems nor the Lib Dems wanting them.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,497
    Another excellent Matt if anyone hasn't seen it:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    :smiley:

    JEO said:


    A Corbyn-Flint led party would be a hoot.

    And an excellent name for a firm of solicitors
    Skinner-Flint would have been even better on both counts.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    JEO said:

    UK could be on the hook for £400 million towards Greece's bridging finance. That will go down like a lead balloon

    It's amazing how we have to keep on paying for a currency union that we opposed.
    We give the EU about £10 billion a year in any case, about the same as foreign aid.
    Avast, Cap'n Doc,

    Call our EU contributions International Aid, shut down the DfID, pass the residual budget to the FCO (who could probably make better use of it) and job done. That would be about £10bn in the bank, or at least off the deficit, It would even be popular with the masses.

    The Notting Hill and Islington sets wouldn't like it (to say nothing of sundry shroud-wavers, and UK haters), mind, so it can't happen.

    Belike, else.

    P.S. When is your birthday?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    MP_SE said:

    JEO said:

    Just looking up Flint's CV makes you realise how poor some of these Labour people's experience is:

    1982-1984 Women's Officer, National Union of Labour Students
    1985-1985 Management Trainee, Inner London Authority
    1985-1987 Policy Officer, Inner London Authority
    1988-1989 Head of Women's Unit, National Union of Students
    1989-1991 Equal Opportunities Officer, Lambeth Council
    1991-1993 Welfare and Staff Development Officer, Lambeth Council
    1994-1997 Senior Researcher and Political Officer, GMB Union
    1997-present Member of Parliament, Labour Party

    She can't even stay in one non-job for more than a couple of years.

    What an embarrassing CV. After 15 odds years and the only thing to show is a list of non-jobs speaks volumes about her. No wonder Labour is so out of touch with the average working man/woman.
    Not that Cameron and Osborne exactly set the world on fire either before politics! Of the present LD and Labour contendors Lamb seems the run who has done the most, having worked for Steele and Co Solicitors and written a book, 'Remedies in the Employment Tribunal'
  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Fenster said:

    I'd really like to see Corbyn as leader.

    I don't say this because I want Labour to fail I am just genuinely interested in what would happen. I think the British people would give him a hearing, after all, there are very few tribal voters out there with entrenched political allegiances.

    Capitalism has its failings and those of us with young kids are worried with what kind of economy we'll have in 15 years time.

    I don't for one minute think that Corbyn and the Labour far-left have the answers to our economic future but I'd like to see him win so he can put detailed policies forward for how he'd position Britain to compete in the global marketplace.

    I'm always up for kooky and unusual ideas to be aired. After all, the outlooks of our main parties have homogenised over the past twenty years.

    What i find interesting about the general left's position on welfare, is just how divorced it is from the reality of how people's behaviour is influenced by receiving it.

    Yet, people live Beveridge who devised it, and those who set it up after 1945, new all too well that there are people out there who will gladly do nothing if given the opportunity.

    You have to be hard as nails with people, and that you have to be aware that rewarding people for making poor short term decision changes their behaviour and creates more negative outcomes. But for them it isnt a negative outcome, because they are being rewarded, often at a level far above what they could earn in the marketplace.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,610

    JEO said:

    UK could be on the hook for £400 million towards Greece's bridging finance. That will go down like a lead balloon

    It's amazing how we have to keep on paying for a currency union that we opposed.
    We give the EU about £10 billion a year in any case, about the same as foreign aid.
    Avast, Cap'n Doc,

    Call our EU contributions International Aid, shut down the DfID, pass the residual budget to the FCO (who could probably make better use of it) and job done. That would be about £10bn in the bank, or at least off the deficit, It would even be popular with the masses.

    The Notting Hill and Islington sets wouldn't like it (to say nothing of sundry shroud-wavers, and UK haters), mind, so it can't happen.

    Belike, else.

    P.S. When is your birthday?
    Ahoy, Mr Llama! Haven't seen you on here in ages! My birthday is in a few months' time!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,087
    AndyJS said:

    "Liz Kendall tells parents to consider how many children they can afford"

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11735544/labour-in-crisis-over-welfare-cuts-live.html

    Is it just me, or is she doubling down on these 'uncomfrotable truths' (as their supporters see them) rather than trying to appeal more widely? I get the impression she knows she is going to do particularly poorly, but is resigned to at least setting out a really distinct position so if the next leader does the opposite and does poorly she is at least well positioned.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    edited July 2015

    HYUFD said:

    notme said:

    HYUFD said:

    Mr. Owls, you'd rather have Corbyn as leader?

    Not a likely election winner but yes.

    Kendall is running for the leadership of, and in, the wrong party IMO
    If you elect Corbyn she might be the right one to lead the New SDP away from the sinking ship.
    Problem with that argument is Kendall is right of where Jenkins and Owen were and right of where Farron will be if he leads the LDs. Were the Tories to elect a rightwinger after Cameron there may be space for a Kendall led 'Blairite' Party to emerge if Corbyn were to be Labour leader, but not at the moment I don't think
    My leadership vote is leaning towards Cooper followed by Corbyn, Farron, Burnham, Lamb, Osborne, Boris and in last place Kendall
    There's a better chance of one of the last three being PM, than one of the first three.
    1 of the last 3 may win GE2020 I agree but it will not be Kendall.

    If Farron wins LD leadership i could easily vote LD at GE2020 unless i have persuaded Mrs BJ to come to Scotland by then.
    Yes, if Farron wins the LD leadership, as now looks likely, I could see several leftwingers switching back to the LDs from Labour if Kendall wins the Labour leadership.

    Being liberal is not the same as being left wing.

    The Lib Dems want the same pro business and prudent economic policies as Liz Kendall. Indded whilst Lib Dems are left wing on social issues they are right wing on economics.

    So I don't see left wing Labour defectors joining the Lib Dems nor the Lib Dems wanting them.
    Except Farron would represent a big shift from Clegg in both areas. He is much more statist than Clegg, much more willing to increase taxes on the rich and much more reluctant to cut spending. He is also slightly more socially conservative being an evangelical Christian, without being aggressive about it.

    So while your argument holds for a Clegg led party, or indeed a Lamb led party, which leftwingers would never vote for, it does not hold for a Farron led party, which many leftwingers would gladly vote for if the alternative was Kendall!
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    A bleeding heart is rarely a sensible mindset when dealing with chancers. And the lazy, feckless and dishonest will always take the piss if you let them.
    notme said:

    Fenster said:

    I'd really like to see Corbyn as leader.

    I don't say this because I want Labour to fail I am just genuinely interested in what would happen. I think the British people would give him a hearing, after all, there are very few tribal voters out there with entrenched political allegiances.

    Capitalism has its failings and those of us with young kids are worried with what kind of economy we'll have in 15 years time.

    I don't for one minute think that Corbyn and the Labour far-left have the answers to our economic future but I'd like to see him win so he can put detailed policies forward for how he'd position Britain to compete in the global marketplace.

    I'm always up for kooky and unusual ideas to be aired. After all, the outlooks of our main parties have homogenised over the past twenty years.

    What i find interesting about the general left's position on welfare, is just how divorced it is from the reality of how people's behaviour is influenced by receiving it.

    Yet, people live Beveridge who devised it, and those who set it up after 1945, new all too well that there are people out there who will gladly do nothing if given the opportunity.

    You have to be hard as nails with people, and that you have to be aware that rewarding people for making poor short term decision changes their behaviour and creates more negative outcomes. But for them it isnt a negative outcome, because they are being rewarded, often at a level far above what they could earn in the marketplace.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    JEO said:

    UK could be on the hook for £400 million towards Greece's bridging finance. That will go down like a lead balloon

    It's amazing how we have to keep on paying for a currency union that we opposed.
    We give the EU about £10 billion a year in any case, about the same as foreign aid.
    Avast, Cap'n Doc,

    Call our EU contributions International Aid, shut down the DfID, pass the residual budget to the FCO (who could probably make better use of it) and job done. That would be about £10bn in the bank, or at least off the deficit, It would even be popular with the masses.

    The Notting Hill and Islington sets wouldn't like it (to say nothing of sundry shroud-wavers, and UK haters), mind, so it can't happen.

    Belike, else.

    P.S. When is your birthday?
    Ahoy, Mr Llama! Haven't seen you on here in ages! My birthday is in a few months' time!
    No, I haven't posted much for quite a while and for my reappearance you can blame on Morris Dancer. I have been lurking though, and so I know your birthday is coming up. What's more, if the drink-addled pit which now passes for my memory is correct, I seem to recall that you said on here that you were going to be forty.

    Now it occurs to me that such a big milestone ought to be marked by your friends, but we cannot do that unless we know the date. Hence my question.

    P.S. How would your mother react if we had a whip round a sent a stripogram girl to your home address?
  • Options
    There is a fascinating story in the house magazine of British Europhilia this evening. Apparently, the European Commission and France are lobbying for bridging finance to Greece to be provided under TFEU article 122(2) and Council Regulation 407/2010/EU. If so, every EU member state would be liable, and the finance could be authorised by the Council by qualified majority vote. As the authors note, Cameron has frequently claimed to have obtained an opt out from bailing out Eurozone countries. He was a fool not to have vetoed the Eurozone states' establishment of the European Stability Mechanism without getting anything for Britain in return, and Parliament was typically naïve when it passed the European Union (Approval of Treaty Amendment Decision) Act 2012 on the faith of his assurances.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,187
    Corbyn just had a hissy-fit on Channel 4 news when asked about his "friends" Hamas and Hisbollah....
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,026

    Corbyn just had a hissy-fit on Channel 4 news when asked about his "friends" Hamas and Hisbollah....

    Are they his 'friends' though - or does he just enjoy tea and biscuits with terrorists ?
  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Plato said:

    A bleeding heart is rarely a sensible mindset when dealing with chancers. And the lazy, feckless and dishonest will always take the piss if you let them.

    notme said:

    Fenster said:

    I'd really like to see Corbyn as leader.

    I don't say this because I want Labour to fail I am just genuinely interested in what would happen. I think the British people would give him a hearing, after all, there are very few tribal voters out there with entrenched political allegiances.

    Capitalism has its failings and those of us with young kids are worried with what kind of economy we'll have in 15 years time.

    I don't for one minute think that Corbyn and the Labour far-left have the answers to our economic future but I'd like to see him win so he can put detailed policies forward for how he'd position Britain to compete in the global marketplace.

    I'm always up for kooky and unusual ideas to be aired. After all, the outlooks of our main parties have homogenised over the past twenty years.

    What i find interesting about the general left's position on welfare, is just how divorced it is from the reality of how people's behaviour is influenced by receiving it.

    Yet, people live Beveridge who devised it, and those who set it up after 1945, new all too well that there are people out there who will gladly do nothing if given the opportunity.

    You have to be hard as nails with people, and that you have to be aware that rewarding people for making poor short term decision changes their behaviour and creates more negative outcomes. But for them it isnt a negative outcome, because they are being rewarded, often at a level far above what they could earn in the marketplace.

    I am from these people. I might now have a nice job, nice home in the country etc. But I know that you cannot deal with these people with a bleeding heart. They will tell you the longest sob story, but in reality they are tough as boots, and will know every wheeze going. Again in many cases their lives are littered with bad decision after bad decision.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I don't think Jeremy Corbyn would be that much of a disaster for Labour compared to their current situation. He'd probably do about the same as Michael Foot in 1983, which wouldn't be a huge decline from May 2015 given how badly they did then.

    Foot won 209 seats, Miliband 232, Kinnock 229 in 1987. Were Corbyn to match Foot's total, Labour would lose another 23 seats!
    232 vs 209 isn't a big difference IMO.
  • Options
    PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138

    There is a fascinating story in the house magazine of British Europhilia this evening. Apparently, the European Commission and France are lobbying for bridging finance to Greece to be provided under TFEU article 122(2) and Council Regulation 407/2010/EU. If so, every EU member state would be liable, and the finance could be authorised by the Council by qualified majority vote. As the authors note, Cameron has frequently claimed to have obtained an opt out from bailing out Eurozone countries. He was a fool not to have vetoed the Eurozone states' establishment of the European Stability Mechanism without getting anything for Britain in return, and Parliament was typically naïve when it passed the European Union (Approval of Treaty Amendment Decision) Act 2012 on the faith of his assurances.

    Are you saying that Cameron is the heir to Blair, Mr Town? You could be right...
  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    edited July 2015
    Plato said:
    As Eric Cartman would say "someone's got some sand in their vagi*a".
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    edited July 2015
    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I don't think Jeremy Corbyn would be that much of a disaster for Labour compared to their current situation. He'd probably do about the same as Michael Foot in 1983, which wouldn't be a huge decline from May 2015 given how badly they did then.

    Foot won 209 seats, Miliband 232, Kinnock 229 in 1987. Were Corbyn to match Foot's total, Labour would lose another 23 seats!
    232 vs 209 isn't a big difference IMO.
    It is the difference between Labour's 3rd worst and worst result in postwar history! In fact Corbyn could well end up closer to Hague and Major's 2001 and 1997 score than Foot's 1983 total
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    He got REALLY stroppy within seconds - bit of a nerve touched there.

    And his explanation "friends in a collective sense"

    Yeah right.
    notme said:

    Plato said:
    As Eric Cartman would say "someone's got some sand in their vagi*a".
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I don't think Jeremy Corbyn would be that much of a disaster for Labour compared to their current situation. He'd probably do about the same as Michael Foot in 1983, which wouldn't be a huge decline from May 2015 given how badly they did then.

    Foot won 209 seats, Miliband 232, Kinnock 229 in 1987. Were Corbyn to match Foot's total, Labour would lose another 23 seats!
    232 vs 209 isn't a big difference IMO.
    It is the difference between Labour's 3rd worst and worst result in postwar history! In fact Corbyn could well end up closer to Hague and Major's 2001 and 1997 score than Foot's 1983 total
    My main point is that I don't think Corbyn would produce a result for Labour like 25% and 150 seats. But he certainly wouldn't do any better than Ed Miliband.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I don't think Jeremy Corbyn would be that much of a disaster for Labour compared to their current situation. He'd probably do about the same as Michael Foot in 1983, which wouldn't be a huge decline from May 2015 given how badly they did then.

    Foot won 209 seats, Miliband 232, Kinnock 229 in 1987. Were Corbyn to match Foot's total, Labour would lose another 23 seats!
    232 vs 209 isn't a big difference IMO.
    It is the difference between Labour's 3rd worst and worst result in postwar history! In fact Corbyn could well end up closer to Hague and Major's 2001 and 1997 score than Foot's 1983 total
    My main point is that I don't think Corbyn would produce a result for Labour like 25% and 150 seats. But he certainly wouldn't do any better than Ed Miliband.
    I am not sure, he would certainly lose seats Miliband won like Wirral West and Chester and a Farron led LDs could also pick up some seats they lost in 2015 to Labour. He might pick up a few in Scotland but Scotland is not as leftwing as some leftwingers like to make out and I cannot see Scottish middle class voters being much impressed by Corbyn, they will stick with Sturgeon
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,380
    edited July 2015
    Plato said:

    He got REALLY stroppy within seconds - bit of a nerve touched there.

    And his explanation "friends in a collective sense"

    Yeah right.

    notme said:

    Plato said:
    As Eric Cartman would say "someone's got some sand in their vagi*a".
    Speaking as someone sympathetic to Israel, I think the content of his reply was intelligent and balanced. It's a pity he got a bit irritable but at least there's some substance there, as opposed to the "We must strive for peaceful solutions" mush that politicians generally use for the issue. I'm getting a bit tempted to vote for him.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,026
    Plato said:
    Tsipras will sort them out with his new found Thatcherite principles.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    "A bit irritable" ?

    Well that's one way of looking at his hissy-hit - arguing with KGM and calling it *tabloid journalism* and raising his voice quite noticeably.

    I think *stroppy* is more accurate.

    Plato said:

    He got REALLY stroppy within seconds - bit of a nerve touched there.

    And his explanation "friends in a collective sense"

    Yeah right.

    notme said:

    Plato said:
    As Eric Cartman would say "someone's got some sand in their vagi*a".
    Speaking as someone sympathetic to Israel, I think the content of his reply was intelligent and balanced. It's a pity he got a bit irritable but at least there's some substance there, as opposed to the "We must strive for peaceful solutions" much that politicians generally use for the issue. I'm getting a bit tempted to vote for him.
  • Options
    JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    Life in a market town,

    The UK has already been involved in several Eurozone bailouts, contrary to Cameron's assurance:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1369390/Portugal-bailout-cost-UK-3bn-PM-Joe-Socrates-resigns.html
    http://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/nov/22/ireland-bailout-uk-lends-seven-billion

    But as you say, it would be very inappropriate if we were forced to bail out Greece also.
  • Options
    JEOJEO Posts: 3,656

    Plato said:

    He got REALLY stroppy within seconds - bit of a nerve touched there.

    And his explanation "friends in a collective sense"

    Yeah right.

    notme said:

    Plato said:
    As Eric Cartman would say "someone's got some sand in their vagi*a".
    Speaking as someone sympathetic to Israel, I think the content of his reply was intelligent and balanced. It's a pity he got a bit irritable but at least there's some substance there, as opposed to the "We must strive for peaceful solutions" mush that politicians generally use for the issue. I'm getting a bit tempted to vote for him.
    I take it "intelligent and balanced" means trying to answer a question different to the one asked, and "a bit irritable" means getting incredibly angry every time the interviewer interrupted to get him to answer the actual question?
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,026

    Plato said:

    He got REALLY stroppy within seconds - bit of a nerve touched there.

    And his explanation "friends in a collective sense"

    Yeah right.

    notme said:

    Plato said:
    As Eric Cartman would say "someone's got some sand in their vagi*a".
    Speaking as someone sympathetic to Israel, I think the content of his reply was intelligent and balanced. It's a pity he got a bit irritable but at least there's some substance there, as opposed to the "We must strive for peaceful solutions" mush that politicians generally use for the issue. I'm getting a bit tempted to vote for him.
    1 Cooper
    2 Burnham
    3 Corbyn
    4 Kendall

    Ta Nick.
  • Options
    EPGEPG Posts: 6,079
    Pulpstar said:

    Plato said:
    Tsipras will sort them out with his new found Thatcherite principles.
    I'm sure the local Eurosceptics will approve this anti-government union militancy.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,026
    Plato said:
    As I've said before isn't trying to draft proper and correct laws a bit more important than attempting to elephant trap the SNP on EVEL ?
  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Plato said:
    It shows quite clearly that they cant keep to their word about not interfering in English only matters. While I would prefer something else to have a showdown over, EVEL is absolutely necessary.

    Poor show.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,942
    Have we had any polls to gauge the response to the budget yet?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022
    Plato said:
    Unbelievable. Especially considering that they are bringing the law into line with what is in force in Scotland.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    In a funny way, I'm rather glad it's this issue - it doesn't matter much in practical terms to the day to day life of hunts, but it has exposed the SNP inability to keep it in their trousers.

    If it had been about something one could somehow argue effected Scotland tangentially - it could get sidetracked - this is totally standalone - and headline grabbing.
    notme said:

    Plato said:
    It shows quite clearly that they cant keep to their word about not interfering in English only matters. While I would prefer something else to have a showdown over, EVEL is absolutely necessary.

    Poor show.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013
    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I don't think Jeremy Corbyn would be that much of a disaster for Labour compared to their current situation. He'd probably do about the same as Michael Foot in 1983, which wouldn't be a huge decline from May 2015 given how badly they did then.

    Foot won 209 seats, Miliband 232, Kinnock 229 in 1987. Were Corbyn to match Foot's total, Labour would lose another 23 seats!
    232 vs 209 isn't a big difference IMO.
    It is the difference between Labour's 3rd worst and worst result in postwar history! In fact Corbyn could well end up closer to Hague and Major's 2001 and 1997 score than Foot's 1983 total
    My main point is that I don't think Corbyn would produce a result for Labour like 25% and 150 seats. But he certainly wouldn't do any better than Ed Miliband.
    Yesterday, I suggested 240 seats under Corbyn. On reflection, I think that's a bit optimistic. But, I could see Labour regaining 20 or so Scotland, while losing a similar number in England and Wales, if he were leader,
  • Options
    JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    notme said:

    Plato said:
    It shows quite clearly that they cant keep to their word about not interfering in English only matters. While I would prefer something else to have a showdown over, EVEL is absolutely necessary.

    Poor show.
    The Conservatives' plans for EVEL would not help here, as it puts English matters through a double majority, needing to pass at both the UK and English levels. So even if it passed the English committee, the SNP could still swing the balance at the UK vote.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,087
    notme said:

    Plato said:

    And into the trap they jump
    htps://twitter.com/adamboultonSKY/status/620671066365657088

    It shows quite clearly that they cant keep to their word about not interfering in English only matters. .
    I thought the SNP had already stated they would interfere as necessary from now on? Not sure why this is an issue that would warrant it, but maybe it's a test case. Not voting on non-Scottish matters was never going to be very realistic for them now they have so many MPs, hence why I thought they'd outright said they might.

  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,048
    RobD said:

    Plato said:
    Unbelievable. Especially considering that they are bringing the law into line with what is in force in Scotland.
    And Cameron's current plans for EVEL would do absolutely nothing to stop this. The Scots would still have he right to help this down under his proposals.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022
    edited July 2015

    RobD said:

    Plato said:
    Unbelievable. Especially considering that they are bringing the law into line with what is in force in Scotland.
    And Cameron's current plans for EVEL would do absolutely nothing to stop this. The Scots would still have he right to help this down under his proposals.
    Yep, which highlights just how stupid the SNP's reaction to the "modest" proposals was.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    As predicted, the SNP will vote on English only matters...

    @JournoStephen: Things that are not going to be edifying: When someone goes through all the votes the SNP has abstained on and picks out the most sensitive.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    That could be the point, handing a stronger position re EVEL HoC changes?

    I may be overly cynical - but I just see TRAP written all over the whole thing.

    RobD said:

    Plato said:
    Unbelievable. Especially considering that they are bringing the law into line with what is in force in Scotland.
    And Cameron's current plans for EVEL would do absolutely nothing to stop this. The Scots would still have he right to help this down under his proposals.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    edited July 2015
    GIN1138 said:

    Have we had any polls to gauge the response to the budget yet?

    Yes, yougov
    https://yougov.co.uk/news/categories/politics/
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    SNP move described as undemocratic by the chairman of the Scottish affairs select committee...

    @schofieldkevin: A lot can change in 9 years, to be fair ... http://t.co/cRbEIWeY1j
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I don't think Jeremy Corbyn would be that much of a disaster for Labour compared to their current situation. He'd probably do about the same as Michael Foot in 1983, which wouldn't be a huge decline from May 2015 given how badly they did then.

    Foot won 209 seats, Miliband 232, Kinnock 229 in 1987. Were Corbyn to match Foot's total, Labour would lose another 23 seats!
    232 vs 209 isn't a big difference IMO.
    It is the difference between Labour's 3rd worst and worst result in postwar history! In fact Corbyn could well end up closer to Hague and Major's 2001 and 1997 score than Foot's 1983 total
    My main point is that I don't think Corbyn would produce a result for Labour like 25% and 150 seats. But he certainly wouldn't do any better than Ed Miliband.
    Yesterday, I suggested 240 seats under Corbyn. On reflection, I think that's a bit optimistic. But, I could see Labour regaining 20 or so Scotland, while losing a similar number in England and Wales, if he were leader,
    Perhaps, but I can't see Corbyn having much appeal in Scotland outside of Glasgow and a few areas of the Central Belt
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited July 2015
    Interesting that we seem to consistently get drawn in. Greece certainly are their own worse enemies undoubtedly but for some reason I just find the whole thing about the EU circus somewhat distasteful. The hypocritical stance of the EU over agreements when Greece ignore them but it appears perfectly ok for the EU to do the same.....

    What gives Juncker the right to tear up a previous deal? Nothing, nothing whatsoever will get in then ay of the project even formal agreements. It is worrying very worrying. Wars have started for less.

    Daily telegraph

    Britain will be liable for close to £1 billion of emergency loans to Greece, it can be revealed, after Jean-Claude Juncker tore up a “black and white” deal to protect UK taxpayers from Eurozone bailouts.
    George Osborne, the Chancellor, today attempted to fight off a proposal to raid the EU budget to save Greek banks from financial collapse... The proposal tosses aside a written agreement between David Cameron and his counterparts that stated British taxpayers would never again be exposed to Eurozone bailouts.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    It looks like the Hunting Bill repeal will now fail with the SNP and Tory rebels joining Labour, even though the law essentially brings England into line with Scotland
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,022
    edited July 2015
    Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I don't think Jeremy Corbyn would be that much of a disaster for Labour compared to their current situation. He'd probably do about the same as Michael Foot in 1983, which wouldn't be a huge decline from May 2015 given how badly they did then.

    Foot won 209 seats, Miliband 232, Kinnock 229 in 1987. Were Corbyn to match Foot's total, Labour would lose another 23 seats!
    232 vs 209 isn't a big difference IMO.
    It is the difference between Labour's 3rd worst and worst result in postwar history! In fact Corbyn could well end up closer to Hague and Major's 2001 and 1997 score than Foot's 1983 total
    My main point is that I don't think Corbyn would produce a result for Labour like 25% and 150 seats. But he certainly wouldn't do any better than Ed Miliband.
    Yesterday, I suggested 240 seats under Corbyn. On reflection, I think that's a bit optimistic. But, I could see Labour regaining 20 or so Scotland, while losing a similar number in England and Wales, if he were leader,
    Yes, could do quite well in Glasgow and Liverpool - that'd be about it. Definitely losing seats in London. It's clear that Corbyn is the answer if you think Labour should be following a 20% strategy. The C4 interview was just a preview of what an f***ing disaster he would be.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    It looks like the Hunting Bill repeal will now fail with the SNP and Tory rebels joining Labour, even though the law essentially brings England into line with Scotland

    There is no proposal to repeal the Hunting Act 2004.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2015
    What I found so surprising is how belligerent he became when challenged. I've only ever seen him do Wise Old Owl.

    He came across as incredibly hot-headed during that intv - and it was without any provocation.

    Either it's his total lack of Big Time media experience - or a glimpse of his persona that he carefully hides in corduroy and Lenin hat.

    Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I don't think Jeremy Corbyn would be that much of a disaster for Labour compared to their current situation. He'd probably do about the same as Michael Foot in 1983, which wouldn't be a huge decline from May 2015 given how badly they did then.

    Foot won 209 seats, Miliband 232, Kinnock 229 in 1987. Were Corbyn to match Foot's total, Labour would lose another 23 seats!
    232 vs 209 isn't a big difference IMO.
    It is the difference between Labour's 3rd worst and worst result in postwar history! In fact Corbyn could well end up closer to Hague and Major's 2001 and 1997 score than Foot's 1983 total
    My main point is that I don't think Corbyn would produce a result for Labour like 25% and 150 seats. But he certainly wouldn't do any better than Ed Miliband.
    Yesterday, I suggested 240 seats under Corbyn. On reflection, I think that's a bit optimistic. But, I could see Labour regaining 20 or so Scotland, while losing a similar number in England and Wales, if he were leader,
    Yes, could do quite well in Glasgow and Liverpool - that'd be about it. Definitely losing seats in London. It's clear that Corbyn is the answer if you think Labour should be following a 20% strategy. The C4 interview was just a preview of what an f***ing disaster he would be.
  • Options
    Moses_ said:

    Interesting that we seem to consistently get drawn in. Greece certainly are their own worse enemies undoubtedly but for some reason I just find the whole thing about the EU circus somewhat distasteful. The hypocritical stance of the EU over agreements when Greece ignore them but it appears perfectly ok for the EU to do the same.....

    What gives Juncker the right to tear up a previous deal? Nothing, nothing whatsoever will get in then ay of the project even formal agreements. It is worrying very worrying. Wars have started for less.

    Cameron settled for a gentleman's agreement rather than a legal guarantee. You reap what you sow.
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    new thread

  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,022
    Plato said:

    What I found so surprising is how belligerent he became when challenged. I've only ever seen him do Wise Old Owl.

    He came across as incredibly hot-headed during that intv - and it was without any provocation.

    Either it's his total lack of Big Time media experience - or a glimpse of his persona that he carefully hides in corduroy and Lenin hat.

    Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I don't think Jeremy Corbyn would be that much of a disaster for Labour compared to their current situation. He'd probably do about the same as Michael Foot in 1983, which wouldn't be a huge decline from May 2015 given how badly they did then.

    Foot won 209 seats, Miliband 232, Kinnock 229 in 1987. Were Corbyn to match Foot's total, Labour would lose another 23 seats!
    232 vs 209 isn't a big difference IMO.
    It is the difference between Labour's 3rd worst and worst result in postwar history! In fact Corbyn could well end up closer to Hague and Major's 2001 and 1997 score than Foot's 1983 total
    My main point is that I don't think Corbyn would produce a result for Labour like 25% and 150 seats. But he certainly wouldn't do any better than Ed Miliband.
    Yesterday, I suggested 240 seats under Corbyn. On reflection, I think that's a bit optimistic. But, I could see Labour regaining 20 or so Scotland, while losing a similar number in England and Wales, if he were leader,
    Yes, could do quite well in Glasgow and Liverpool - that'd be about it. Definitely losing seats in London. It's clear that Corbyn is the answer if you think Labour should be following a 20% strategy. The C4 interview was just a preview of what an f***ing disaster he would be.
    Yes, I was genuinely surprised: Corbyn the combustible!
Sign In or Register to comment.